P.A. RASHEED Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, a registered owner of a contract carriage, faced revenue recovery proceedings on account of non-payment of tax due under the provisions of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1976, and the Rules. He then took the stand that he had filed G-forms for three different quarters, and accordingly, he filed an appeal before the jurisdictional Deputy Transport Commissioner. That authority called for and perused the records. It also heard the versions of the appellant and the department. It, categorically, found on the basis of the records, that G-forms for those periods were not in the file. This was expressly stated in the order issued by the Appellate Authority on 09/11/2006, wherein it was also noted that the application for tax exemption from 01/04/2005 to 31/03/2006 is still pending with the Joint RTO, Irinjalakkuda.

(2.) The Deputy Transport Commissioner's order was carried in revision, pointedly, pleading that acknowledgments were issued for filing of G-forms. This we see in paragraph No. 6 and ground No. E of the revision memorandum dated 19/01/2007 filed by the appellant before the Transport Commissioner. Strangely, the appellant did not produce the original acknowledgments or authenticated copies thereof even before that revisional authority, in spite of the fact that the sole issue generated for consideration was as to whether he had filed the G-forms and whether the authority concerned had acknowledged receipt of the G-forms. The revisional authority dismissed the revision on 06/08/2007.

(3.) It was only by 17/03/2008, that the appellant filed the writ petition, from which this appeal arises. Even in the writ petition, he did not produce the acknowledgments regarding the filing of the G-forms. The department filed counter-affidavit through the 4th respondent, the Joint RTO, stating, among other things, that the so-called G-forms were not submitted in the office as per the records. It was also contended that the signatures as shown affixed by the then Public Relation Officers of that office as proof of having received the G-forms mentioned in Exts. P1 to P6 are fake and it is clear that they are purposefully fabricated for the purpose of misguiding the Court. No reply affidavit was filed by the appellant to the aforesaid counter-affidavit dated 19/07/2008.